California governor vetoes bill requiring warrants for police drones

Despite widely clearing both the state’s Senate and Assembly, California Governor Jerry Brown shot down a bill on Sunday that would have imposed restrictions on when law enforcement agencies can use drones for surveillance.

Brown, a Democrat, said in a statement over the weekend that he
was vetoing the drone accountability act that, had it been signed
into law, would require police agencies to obtain a warrant
before using an unmanned vehicle, or drone, for aerial
surveillance.

"There are undoubtedly circumstances where a warrant is
appropriate. The bill's exceptions, however, appear to be too
narrowand could impose requirements beyond what is required by
either the Fourth Amendment or the privacy provisions in the
California Constitution," Brown said on Sunday.

One of the bill's authors, Republican Assemblyman Jeff Gorell,
said in a tweet on Sunday that "The era of govt. surveillance
continues” after the governor’s veto was announced.

As RT reported previously, the California State Senate voted 25-8 last month in favor of the bill,
AB 1327, after it cleared the Assembly in January by a margin of
59-5.

"The potential for abuse of drones is high and we need to be
vigilant to ensure our Constitutional rights are protected,"
bill co-author and Democratic State Senator Ted Lieu told Reuters
earlier this year.

“Drones are going to be extremely important for hot pursuit,
which is allowed in this bill, for search and rescue and, when
you get a warrant, for continuous surveillance” of a
location, Assemblyman Bill Quirk (D-Hayward), another co-author,
said similarly.

According to Brown, however, the efforts of the bill’s creators
to try and curb potential drone abuses clash with what the
California governor believes to be the rights of law enforcement
officers.

Had Gov. Brown signed his name to the bill, it would have
required a warrant for drone surveillance missions except in
instances of environmental emergencies, such as oil or chemical
spills, when aerial vehicles could be deployed at the drop of a
hat. Additionally, the data recorded by the drones would in most
instances have to be destroyed within one year.

"It's disappointing that the governor decided to side with
law enforcement in this case over the privacy interests of
California,” Assemblyman Gorell told the Los Angeles Times.

Earlier this month, a group of law professors wrote Gov. Brown’s
office urging him to sign the bill into law because, according to
the educators, failing to do as much may have great consequences.

"Misuse of drones may chill First Amendment activity and lead
to high-tech racial profiling," the letter said in part.
Separately, activists gathered in downtown LA last month to
rally against the city’s police department’s
plans to begin using drones of their own.

The National Conference of State Legislatures says that 20 states
across the US have enacted laws pertaining to the use of drones
by law enforcement agencies, and President Barack Obama is
reportedly preparing an executive order that will require federal
agencies that use unmanned aerial vehicles to disclose more
details about how they are used.